PDA

View Full Version : Bleacher report: How Draft Round Affects a RB's Career Performace


s0phr0syne
04-21-2009, 05:21 AM
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/158159-how-draft-round-affects-a-running-backs-career-performance


Excerpt of the article's conclusions:

What Does All of This Mean?

1. If you're a franchise wanting to draft a running back, you should aim to get one in the first three rounds, if not the first or second.

2. After the third round, every running back is the same. Seriously! Either draft a back in the first three rounds, or wait until rounds six and seven to draft your running back.

3. Teams looking to draft players like Mike Goodson or Jeremiah Johnson in the middle rounds should just wait to draft Ian Johnson or P.J. Hill in the last round.



---------------------------------------------


The link goes to the article, and you can see the complete analysis with the statistics (and pretty looking graphs)..


I think it's a flawed analysis in that a major part of RB success is predicated on opportunity, and that opportunity comes more readily to RBs drafted in the first rounds. The sad part is, there have been hundreds of capable backs (or really, just players in general) who would have "made it" if given a chance to tote the rock in the right system, but never got that opportunity.

However, that probably doesn't explain everything, and there's something to be said for top tier athlete RBs having better careers. This article would support some of the people who advocate an RB in the first 3 picks. I'm down with that, but I just wish we had taken less of a shotgun approach in FA to the RB situation. I think we signed at least 1 RB too many...probably Arrington, but really you could make a case for any of them being superfluous.

Paladin
04-21-2009, 05:48 AM
Unnecessary, too.....

BowlenBall
04-21-2009, 06:00 AM
and redundant....

cmhargrove
04-21-2009, 06:05 AM
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/158159-how-draft-round-affects-a-running-backs-career-performance


Excerpt of the article's conclusions:





---------------------------------------------


The link goes to the article, and you can see the complete analysis with the statistics (and pretty looking graphs)..


I think it's a flawed analysis in that a major part of RB success is predicated on opportunity, and that opportunity comes more readily to RBs drafted in the first rounds. The sad part is, there have been hundreds of capable backs (or really, just players in general) who would have "made it" if given a chance to tote the rock in the right system, but never got that opportunity.

However, that probably doesn't explain everything, and there's something to be said for top tier athlete RBs having better careers. This article would support some of the people who advocate an RB in the first 3 picks. I'm down with that, but I just wish we had taken less of a shotgun approach in FA to the RB situation. I think we signed at least 1 RB too many...probably Arrington, but really you could make a case for any of them being superfluous.

I haven't read the article yet, but it's an interesting proposition.

Looking back at the past few years for our beloved Broncos this is an interesting article. Look at the past few "flash in the pan" RB's we have used in Denver (Selvin Young, Andre Hall, Mike Bell). You could say that we have received tremendous value from UDFA running backs, but at what price? It seems like we are constantly running new guys through, and many have the stamina for about half a season before their bodies give out.

The last two high picks we spent on RB's were Tatum and Clinton. Portis was an "out of the park" homerun, Tatum was decently successful for a few years (at least more than one).

I went to the Jacksonville game last year and was insanely jealous of MJD carving up our defense. I love watching the Carolina running game these days with Deangelo Williams and Jonathan Stewart. Over the past few years with San Diego, its wasn't their passing game that beat us, it was their running game with LT, Sproles, and Turner. Even KC has beat the crap out of us with LJ.

I, for one, wouldn't be upset at all to take Wells or Moreno with one of our first round picks. A talented RB would take tremendous heat off our "average" QB's and allow the system to work. Rebuild the defense by all means, but don't be afraid to pull the trigger on a first round RB if you think they can be a star.

srphoenix
04-21-2009, 09:01 AM
i really hope we get knowshown moreno with the 18 pick, that would be a tremendous value to us and lets us take him just a pick or two before he is supposed to be taken...

hopefully we get raji or tyson jackson with the 12,

i still say no to mauluga, i'm not real high on any of the usc players.

SonOfLe-loLang
04-21-2009, 09:16 AM
i really hope we get knowshown moreno with the 18 pick, that would be a tremendous value to us and lets us take him just a pick or two before he is supposed to be taken...

hopefully we get raji or tyson jackson with the 12,

i still say no to mauluga, i'm not real high on any of the usc players.

I still don't get the "im not high on USC players" bit. Its incredibly non-sensical

srphoenix
04-21-2009, 12:50 PM
i guess i'd rather see in the college setting a guy who was a star in his own right, a guy who the coaches always gameplanned against but still put up numbers.

in usc's case, they had so many weapons on defense that you were unable to focus on one thus i think their players are a bit overrated because of the overall level of talent around them. If you were to put one of those players on a lesser schools team and make him be the main playmaker i think he would fall short.

SonOfLe-loLang
04-21-2009, 01:06 PM
i guess i'd rather see in the college setting a guy who was a star in his own right, a guy who the coaches always gameplanned against but still put up numbers.

in usc's case, they had so many weapons on defense that you were unable to focus on one thus i think their players are a bit overrated because of the overall level of talent around them. If you were to put one of those players on a lesser schools team and make him be the main playmaker i think he would fall short.

there are enough USC players doing well in the NFL to suggest otherwise. And dont give me Matt Leinart as an example...his sample size is not near big enough yet

Gcver2ver3
04-21-2009, 01:13 PM
there are enough USC players doing well in the NFL to suggest otherwise. And dont give me Matt Leinart as an example...his sample size is not near big enough yet

well i think part of the reason Cushing & Matthews & Rey are being hyped so much is due to the success of prior players now in the NFL...

but i tend to think Cushing & Matthews are products of playing with other good players and playing against subpar Pac-10 competition...

i also wouldn't be surpised if they were on the juice...

i consider Rey the exception...i think he will be a good run stuffing MLB in this league...